No.
They haven't won again.
The winning or not happens in the next days and weeks.

Initially, while the extent of the action and the precise nature of
the delivery method" is not 100% certain then prudent action is to
over-react. That's not terrorists winning - that's fighting with
terrorists. Travel chaos is just part of the cost of doing business.

The next stage is crucial. You either rapidly take note of what you
have learned and move to open up the system again as much as is
reasonably possible. They win if instead you go into catatonic navel
gazing mode as, sadly, tended to happen after (and still, since)
"911". Terrorists win when the reaction of the authorities is grossly
more inconvenient and oppressive than the actions which cause them.
Those like eg the IRA used to understand this well enough. What 'they'
need to do now is to employ some average Israeli citizens as
consultants :-). [[This comment has NOTHING to do with the
unpleasantness going on on their northern border at present]]. There
over the last few decades they have become so accustomed to living
with ongoing terror threat, scraping up the bodies when they happen,
and then getting on with life, that terror has become far less
effective as a weapon against mass public opinion. And mass public
opinion is what the terrorists are attempting to affect.

On Thu, Aug 10, 2006 at 11:55:33PM +1200, Russell McMahon wrote:
> Added [OT] tag.
>
> No.
> They haven't won again.
> The winning or not happens in the next days and weeks.

If anything the two allegedly big terrorist operations, in the UK and a
few months ago the mass arrest in Canada, show that police and
intellegence are starting to get their act together and catching these
people. Heck, in Canada at least aparently the intelligence work needed
to catch the alleged terrorists was done with completely legal means,
all wiretaps with proper warrents etc.

I'll be a very good sign if no further reductions in civil liberties
arise from the UK case, as hasn't happened in Canada.

Hmm, they have won to the extent that practically nothing in the way of air
traffic is leaving any UK airport - and it has caused any flights to/from
the UK to marked as red alert in the USA. People are not even being allowed
to take a book through the security check, according to one report I have
heard (don't think it was in any of the links I sent).

I humbly submit that we owe it to ourselves to at least consider the fact
that the exaggeration (or outright fabrication) of this latest terrorist
threat story would serve the interests of the world's most powerful
political forces.

> Sent: Friday, August 11, 2006 2:03 AM
> To: Microcontroller discussion list - Public.
> Subject: Re: [OT] Terrorists have won again ...
>
> I humbly submit that we owe it to ourselves to at least
> consider the fact that the exaggeration (or outright
> fabrication) of this latest terrorist threat story would
> serve the interests of the world's most powerful political forces.
>
> RR

Yes, passengers have to spend more time at the duty free shops, and the
baggage handlers get a better shot at pinching stuff from the luggage
(carry-on is banned).

Not quite the joke it seems in Sydney. Plans are afoot to make the terminal
more efficient, which somehow entails removing the clear run from entry to
the check-in, and making you take the long way past all the shops.

...and as for the baggage handlers:
<www.smh.com.au/news/National/A-baggage-handler-took-my-camel-suit/20
05/04/07/1112815671754.html>

Of course, it could be this:
<www.smh.com.au/news/world/midair-terror-bomb-plot-foiled/2006/08/10/
1154803014053.html>

Not possible
The combined power of the world's political forces is totally
benevolent.
They care for us as shepherds ^1 for their sheep.
AGSC

^1 or is it schleopards ?

On 2006-Aug 10, at 10:02hrs AM, Rob Robson wrote:

I humbly submit that we owe it to ourselves to at least consider the
fact
that the exaggeration (or outright fabrication) of this latest terrorist
threat story would serve the interests of the world's most powerful
political forces.

On Thu, 2006-08-10 at 09:02 -0700, Rob Robson wrote:
> I humbly submit that we owe it to ourselves to at least consider the fact
> that the exaggeration (or outright fabrication) of this latest terrorist
> threat story would serve the interests of the world's most powerful
> political forces.

Without question.

It was similar when the "canadian terrorist" story came out. Every bit
of the story just seemed so "perfect" for furthering some of the agendas
out there.

I'm mostly keeping my mouth shut on all of these stories. All I'll say
is that, without question in my mind, the terrorists have won, long ago.

>I humbly submit that we owe it to ourselves to at least consider the
>fact
> that the exaggeration (or outright fabrication) of this latest
> terrorist
> threat story would serve the interests of the world's most powerful
> political forces.

Accepted.
Considering.
...
Bzzt.
Rejected.
It's quite obvious that the Chinese government has nothing to do with
this.